Tsikbal: from my perspective

It irks me when I hear the term hacker in mostly negative ways, then a hacker does something like this and it remains me of the original sense of hacking. On the original days of computers, hackers came together to try to come with new ways to use what they had. Most hackers continue to do this, sometimes doing things that could be at least be called dubious just to prove it can be done. The Xbox One gamepad is one example of a hacker coming with an use that some gamers wanted, but that Microsoft wasn't giving to them. For me, that's an area where open source can be of help to hackers and hackers can give to open source. In many ways, if you allow hackers to adapt software and hardware openly to other uses and to let them contribute their hacks back to the community is one of the best ways to make open source projects better faster. And by having those hacks occurring openly, the risk of having any malicious side of it coming out of it to a minimum. As with anythi...

As I was watching Cosmos last night, somehow I realized how similar the scientific and FLOSS communities are in many respects. Both communities do they strive on individuals working together, in an open way that promotes sharing information and testing ideas before they become accepted as facts. People test each others ideas, and put them to work when they prove their value. Even though most of the time they work in parallel to each other, they do have points where each other interact. Where one provides with tools, or ideas, that allows the other work toward their objectives a lot more efficiently. Though FLOSS owes its existence to the science, since without the discoveries made by the scientific communities the FLOSS community wouldn't have much to work on, FLOSS does pay back that debt by giving back tool that allow science to move forward. Both help each other grow and move forward, it could be said that both communities live in a symbiotic relationship. What...

Going through the comments of a post on Google + today, I came to realize that the GNU/Linux community doesn't actually needs a perfect distro. There is a need that available distros work the best they can for the purpose they where made. Each and every distro will have it's inherent strengths and weaknesses, and there is nothing bad or wrong with it. The main thing, is that they do what their users need from them. The fact that GNU/Linux has the flexibility to be used to make the vast array of distros, from general purpose to specific use, speaks volumes of how good it is for developers and users alike. It gives both the ability to create distros that carter specific needs, tastes and work flows all built on a common base. In some sense, the perfect distro depends on the specific needs of each user. What's the intended use for the distro will dictate what it needs to work, and how it should do things. It's a mistake to try to have one distro to do all, spe...

The more I think about it, the more I realize that tablets aren't for me. If I aren't at home, where using a laptop is way more convenient for me, I'm more likely to be at my favorite coffee shop or bar where using my smartphone to check in or send a quick text is way more practical. At home, I'm either surfing the web, editing my blogs, chatting or on a video call. For me, it's a lot more practical to use my laptop, which has the added bonus that I can take to my favorite coffee shop or my best friend house to either do some work or just geek out. I simply can't see myself using a tablet to do any of this, I just find it to be rather uncomfortable and they still can't do the kind of multitasking I do. When I go out, I prefer to take a smartphone with me. It allows me to quickly check in on Foursquare, take a quick photo or note, and to listen to my music on the go. Not only that, it also helps me to keep me in touch with texts, Whatsapp or a quick ...

At work, we use SAP to manage our most of our key aspects of our daily operations. It has made evident the weaknesses of using proprietary software, and how frustrating they can be. Two of weaknesses are the most evident, and the ones that impact us the most. The first one, is the fact that when a fix is needed on the inner working of the software there is no way it can be done within the organization itself. We need to go the people who provide us with the licences so that they fix the problem. This means that it takes longer to solve the problem, and at times there have been some misunderstandings since the one who made the fix wasn't the one who received the information about it on first place. In our case, we have people who are more than capable to fix any of the problems we have been facing. Yet, they have their hands tied because they can't do it because they don't have the access needed to make it so. The other problem, is that we are in a position wher...